Hey so to let you know the malvinas were actually habitated by argentines and even before that before spain even got to américa there were Onas, that part it's usually overlook but it had people living there! The british murdered them all and stole the land, and now the use the self determination excuse but it's like saying that Palestine shouldn't reclaim their land because now israelies live there like ?????? That's fucked up. In argentina we still have descendents of the Onas's community and they fought in the war, we are not only an inmigrant country but a country made by it's original population and we protect their land too. Right now Israel is trying to steal land from Mapuches (another tribe original from the patagonia) and with support of the UK............. argentina is far from a perfect country but supporting settlers over people who has lived here for hundreds of years it's evil shit
Hey! So first of all thank you for the ask. There's a reason that I put on my reblog that people were welcome to give me additional information and this is it. So thank you for taking the time to type it out.
This is all very interesting to me and so to guide my opinions on the topic I am now going to look into this information.
The Habitation of the Malvinas by the Onas
The Onas mentioned in the ask appear to also be referred to as the Selk'nam. This article discusses the history of the people. The article and also others (e.g this one and this one) tend to refer to the Onas as living specifically in Tierra del Fuego. They go into detail about the horrific treatment of the group at the hands of the Spanish and English colonisers. One specific example is the taking of previously open hunting ground used by the Onas by the settlers for sheep farming. The Selk'nam began to hunt the sheep, which were in their own territory, to which the settlers responded by beginning to hunt the Selk'nam. Hunters were paid by farmers if they returned with 'proof' of having killed the Selk'nam, for example by bringing them their ears. Fucked up.
While the last Onas died in the 1970s, from what I have read there seem to be about 1,000 across Argentina and Chile who claim to be descendants of the group. I did try to look at census data, but being unable to read Spanish I could not find what I was looking for.
In short, yes, the land of the Onas was taken by British settlers, and there was a campaign of extermination against the Onas by these settlers, which is completely and utterly disgusting.
While looking into this, I have been unable to find articles discussing the habitation of the Malvinas by the Onas. All of the information I can find states that there were no people living there before the first settlers arrived.
The article below is called 'Sheep Sovereignties: The Colonization of the Falkland Islands/Malvinas, Patagonia, and Tierra del Fuego, 1830s–1910s'. It goes into detail about the colonisation of not only the Malvinas but also of Tierra del Fuego. The extract I have taken is from page 2 of the document.
There was no original population on the Malvinas/Falkland Islands, nor were there anyendemic land mammals, and for centuries the docking of ships of diverse origin wassporadic at best. Expeditions alternated under different flags, leaving cattle behind forfuture stopovers on its isolated, grassy terrain. Not until the late 18th century did anexpedition by a Frenchman named Bougainville establish a settlement intended to bepermanent, despite opposition from Great Britain and Spain, which claimed possession ofthe islands under the Viceroyship of Río de La Plata by virtue of the Treaty of Tordesillas.
This second article is from the Argentine Embassy in the UK. The extract I have taken is from the section titled 'Who were the first settlers?'
There was no indigenous population on the islands. The first inhabitants were French, who settled in 1764 and called them îles Malouines. Spain protested as soon as it was aware of the French
settlement and obtained the explicit recognition of Spanish sovereignty from the King of France. The settlement was then transferred from the French to the Spanish. In the periods 1765-70 and 1771-74 a small British garrison was established on one of the islets of the archipelago, which was first forced out by the Spanish authorities and in 1774 evacuated by the British, leaving the whole of the Malvinas Islands under the full control of Spain.
I did find a study called 'Evidence of prehistoric human activity in the Faulkland Islands' which I found particularly interesting. I will paste a section of the study below, but I would recommend reading the full thing. (Disclaimer - I am not an academic and I do not have the experience to evaluate the validity (for lack of a better term) of such studies.)
Of the several groups inhabiting Tierra del Fuego during the Holocene, the evidence at New Island is most consistent with culture of the Yaghan (Yámana) people, highly capable seafarers subsisting on a marine diet composed largely of seals, penguins, and shellfish (33). They hunted sea lions and seals with bone harpoons hafted to wooden handles, and meat and skins were processed using mussel shells hafted to wooden handles (33). While stone points were used by the Yaghan, they were used infrequently and typically only for arrows, which they sometimes used to hunt penguins (33). Before European colonization, the Yaghan were highly mobile people without permanent settlements, and families (including canids) traveled together by dugout canoe as far as the Diego Ramírez Islands, located 105 km southwest of Cape Horn in the Drake Passage (33).
Based on ethnographic accounts of Yaghan people, it follows that evidence of their presence in the Falkland Islands would include (i) increased fire activity, (ii) utilization of coastal resources such as sea lions and penguins, and (iii) the presence of canids. The findings reported here are consistent with these expectations, although we are unable to determine whether these were intentional visits. We think it unlikely that prehistoric peoples had a sustained presence in the Falkland Islands. Rather, the evidence supports one or more temporary visitations or accidental landings that left behind little cultural material but resulted in a discernable anthropogenic fingerprint in the fossil record.
Again, if you have any extra information, or there are any glaring issues with the articles I have linked that I have missed, please do make me aware. This is the information that I have found from my research into the ask that you have sent me. I am not an academic, just a regular person who enjoys learning about history.
I am aware that because I can't read Spanish, I may be missing out on some key information which I may have found otherwise.
If you got all the way to the end, cheers for reading. I've enjoyed looking into this lots. Thank you, savagesyeah, for sending this ask to me. It has allowed me to widen my knowledge on the topic.
